All posts in the topic Prince St bridge (Short link)

Topic Navigation

Useful Links

Topics in Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum

Summary

There are 19 posts — by 15 authors — in this topic.
Latest post made by Steve Loughan at Nov 14 20:36 UTC

From: charlie bolton Date: Nov 06 18:48 UTC Short link

As an alternative to residents parking, what do people think about proposals to
close half of Prince St Bridge to vehicles, put in traffic lights and leave the
rest for cyclists/pedestrians?



Charlie Bolton
Green Party Councillor
Southville

From: Bob Corfield Date: Nov 06 19:02 UTC Short link

One word - madness.

From: Matthew Symonds Date: Nov 06 19:46 UTC Short link

I take it that meant Madness that they haven't done it sooner.

I don't know it's taken so long. I fully support the trial and hope that it
makes the bridge much safer for the thousands of pedestrians and cyclists that
use it every day
Best wishesMatthew > To: <email obscured>> From:
<email obscured>> Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge> Date:
Fri, 7 Nov 2008 08:03:07 +1300> > One word - madness.> > > Bob Corfield>
Southville, Bristol> Info about Bob Corfield:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/5srxiqAd3NpmdV3roiakEo> > This topic's messages
may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/68cmOKYx9HVRYwtTtqJQD1>

From: John Purkiss Date: Nov 06 20:20 UTC Short link

One word - brilliant!

3 more words - about time too.

From: Hilary Irvine Date: Nov 06 21:54 UTC Short link

Excellent, but why not close the whole bridge?

From: Gail Lambourne Date: Nov 06 22:23 UTC Short link

I think it's a fab idea.  And if by chance they did consider closing the whole
bridge, even better!

From: Lloyd Fletcher Date: Nov 07 09:04 UTC Short link

Here's another one of the those ideas that sounds good in principle and at
first glance, as well as from a purely self-centred perspective. But I wonder
if the solution really solves an underlying problem, and wether there are
unintended consequences that will make matters worse...

By closing one lane, the effective car-carrying capacity of the bridge will be
significantly reduced; traffic congestion in peak times will inevitably
increase (e.g., tailbacks to the Louisiana corner, which will make it trickier
for bikes, I would have thought). Without better public transport, there is no
"outlet" for this bottleneck. Maybe the tradeoff in improvement for
pedestrians/cyclists is worth it? I'm not yet convinced.

Of course it is a scary bridge to walk across, but if all the cyclists and
pedestrians are now to share just one lane (I'm assuming that only one walk-way
will remain open), isn't there an increased risk of collision between cyclists
and pedestrians? Will both be using the roadway, in both directions? Or will
walkers be confined to the path? Can two bikes safely pass each other on that
narrow road, with walkers more likely to step on and off the sidewalk (which
happens now, even with cars crossing)?

Although it's a risky spot, I'm not aware that it has an above average accident
history: one Cabot councillor says it doesn't. Would a less expensive, less
drastic approach be to simply lower the speed limit across the bridge to 10mph?
(and enforce it of course)

At the very least, a pilot study over a couple of weeks with temporary lights,
and proper (i.e., statistically valid) measurement of effects before and after
could be conducted before investing in permanent systems. Only then can a fully
informed choice be made.

From: Marvin D Date: Nov 07 10:20 UTC Short link

Being principally a walker and cyclist I'm all for increasing access and
safety for pedestrians and peddlers. It's a hairy place to cross on foot and
some drivers seem to take it as a challenge to see how fast they can tear
through there without hitting the posts. Looking at the amount of dents and
paint transfer on the posts I assume many have failed over the years. But
Lloyd Fletcher makes valid points about traffic lights and one lane
bottlenecking. Pushing car chaos along the road inevitably just makes
problems for someone else. It'd be great as one person on this forum
suggested to have no traffic on the bridge at all if you are walking/cycling
and you could feasibly just have a turning circle for motorists before the
brigde in Wapping Road, and stop vehicle traffic going over it from either
direction. It would make the cycle/walk route along the quayside join up and
be safer. But then it is a long way around for motorists coming from the
other direction to get out along Cumberland Road.  Alternatively you could
but speed humps before the bridge to force drivers to slow right down before
crossing, and with signage/markings show that pedestrians and cyclists have
priorty on the bridge so drivers must wait for them when they are using it.
But I am not convinced that this should be a priority for spending when the
City is faced with so many other pressing issues.

MD


----- Original Message -----
From: "Lloyd Fletcher" <lafletcher@blueyonder.co.uk>
To: "Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum"
<bemmy-forum@forums.e-democracy.org>
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 9:06 AM
Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge


> Here's another one of the those ideas that sounds good in principle and at
> first glance, as well as from a purely self-centred perspective. But I
> wonder if the solution really solves an underlying problem, and wether
> there are unintended consequences that will make matters worse...
>
> By closing one lane, the effective car-carrying capacity of the bridge
> will be significantly reduced; traffic congestion in peak times will
> inevitably increase (e.g., tailbacks to the Louisiana corner, which will
> make it trickier for bikes, I would have thought). Without better public
> transport, there is no "outlet" for this bottleneck. Maybe the tradeoff in
> improvement for pedestrians/cyclists is worth it? I'm not yet convinced.
>
> Of course it is a scary bridge to walk across, but if all the cyclists and
> pedestrians are now to share just one lane (I'm assuming that only one
> walk-way will remain open), isn't there an increased risk of collision
> between cyclists and pedestrians? Will both be using the roadway, in both
> directions? Or will walkers be confined to the path? Can two bikes safely
> pass each other on that narrow road, with walkers more likely to step on
> and off the sidewalk (which happens now, even with cars crossing)?
>
> Although it's a risky spot, I'm not aware that it has an above average
> accident history: one Cabot councillor says it doesn't. Would a less
> expensive, less drastic approach be to simply lower the speed limit across
> the bridge to 10mph? (and enforce it of course)
>
> At the very least, a pilot study over a couple of weeks with temporary
> lights, and proper (i.e., statistically valid) measurement of effects
> before and after could be conducted before investing in permanent systems.
> Only then can a fully informed choice be made.
>
>
> --Lloyd
>
>
> Lloyd Fletcher
> Redcliffe, Bristol
> Info about Lloyd Fletcher: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/lloydfletcher
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/69EMGu6yLNYRGBJs9Xy6eQ
> -----------------------------------------
>  To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>  in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
>  More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
>  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
>
>  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net

From: Roger Horwood Date: Nov 07 13:43 UTC Short link

I cycle across it most days, and walk across it occasionally. I don't find it
too bad to cycle across at present - it's not perfect but there are much worse
spots on my route. It's very poor for pedestrians though as the pavement is far
too narrow so something needs to change, but I object to the Cycle City money
paying for the change unless it makes things better for cyclists. The present
proposals as outlined by Charlie above wouldn't do that on their own and might
make things worse. There also needs to be a continuous cycle route from the
centre to Prince Street bridge, and then via Wapping Wharf to Cumberland Road
near Gaol Ferry Bridge. That way, a large proportion of the cycle traffic will
never need to cross the stream of motor vehicles to use the pedestrian & cycle
west half of the bridge when heading south. The route could go from the Centre
along Narrow Quay as far as Farr's Lane, then a contraflow cycle lane south
along Prince Street to the bridge. I believe there are already plans for a
cycle route through the new Wapping Wharf development.

From: Ben barker Date: Nov 07 14:02 UTC Short link

Here's a revolutionary idea;

Two sides of the bridge:

1.   Motor traffic taking it in turns on one side to go north and south (if
we must).

2.   Pedestrians only on the other side.

3.   Cyclists can choose either to brave the motor traffic side or get off
their bikes and push them for 20 yards.

Cheers,   Ben.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Horwood" <rogerharbord@bigfoot.com>
To: "Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum"
<bemmy-forum@forums.e-democracy.org>
Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 1:45 PM
Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge


>I cycle across it most days, and walk across it occasionally. I don't find
>it too bad to cycle across at present - it's not perfect but there are much
>worse spots on my route. It's very poor for pedestrians though as the
>pavement is far too narrow so something needs to change, but I object to
>the Cycle City money paying for the change unless it makes things better
>for cyclists. The present proposals as outlined by Charlie above wouldn't
>do that on their own and might make things worse. There also needs to be a
>continuous cycle route from the centre to Prince Street bridge, and then
>via Wapping Wharf to Cumberland Road near Gaol Ferry Bridge. That way, a
>large proportion of the cycle traffic will never need to cross the stream
>of motor vehicles to use the pedestrian & cycle west half of the bridge
>when heading south. The route could go from the Centre along Narrow Quay as
>far as Farr's Lane, then a contraflow cycle lane south along Prince Street
>to the bridge. I believe there
> are already plans for a cycle route through the new Wapping Wharf
> development.
>
>
> Roger Horwood
> Bedminster, Bristol
> Info about Roger Horwood:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/6gXiPBFOTbJDV0PYEVT9WE
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/zZqYMVlVE4VBkydX4uXOD
> -----------------------------------------
>  To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>  To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>  in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
>  More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
>  http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
>
>  E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.175 / Virus Database: 270.9.0/1773 - Release Date: 11/7/2008
9:08 AM

From: Tess Green Date: Nov 07 15:10 UTC Short link

Unfortunately these proposals are for the use of the bridge for bendy
buses as part of the proposed rapid transport scheme from Ashton Park
and Ride to the centre of Bristol. The bridge isn't wide enough for
two way bendy buses otherwise we may have faced the prospect of
closure to ALL other types of traffic. As it is, the bendy buses need
more than half of the bridge so a small space alongside these
monsters can be spared for pedestrians and cyclists. Neither cycling
nor pedestrian organisations appear to have been consulted about
these plans and the RT consultants are being very coy about how much
space will be left for these most sustainable means of transport.Tess
Green

From: Bob Corfield Date: Nov 07 15:44 UTC Short link

Re Tess Green's input.  So, how will the bendy buses get across the bridge? A
large 4x4 barely fits between the bridge girders now. Does this mean the bridge
is going to be rebuilt to take the bendy buses?

From: Matthew Symonds Date: Nov 07 15:45 UTC Short link

Tess

We were both at the same consultation event on the proposed Ashton Vale to
Temple Meads rapid Transport meeting yesterday and I seem to have got a
completely different interpretation than you (I'm assuming I've interpreted it
differently as I'm sure you wouldn't intentionally give faulse information).

At the meeting when Prince Street Bridge was discussed it was made clear that
the trial closure is part of the Cycle Demonstration City and not as an advance
measure for the rapid transport plan.

The council officers present siad they were still looking at options for the
Prince Street Bridge one of which was to avoid it all together.

We were informed that there are complications with the bridge not only due to
its size but also that it is a listed structure and that they are considering
all sorts of options that included a route to Temple Meads another way,
potentially rebuilding the bridge it with the existing sides but the current
(structural) central support taken out providing more room.
The proposals set out also made very clear that 'high quality walking and cycle
routes' would be built in alongside any Rapid Transport route.The officers were
explicit about this.

It was very clear at the meeting that you are very opposed to a bus based rapid
transport route and would prefer a tram of train based option (which we were
told was three times more expensive and not affordable withing the budget
available). You are absolutely entitled to your view on this but I think it's
not really fair to suggest something that simply wasn't said or even implied
about space for walkers and cyclists.  Matthew <email obscured>

---------- __0  --------\_ \------- (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol, better by bike>
CC: <email obscured>; <email obscured>;
<email obscured>; <email obscured>> From:
<email obscured>> Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge> Date: Fri,
7 Nov 2008 15:49:08 -0800> To: <email obscured>> > Unfortunately
these proposals are for the use of the bridge for bendy > buses as part of the
proposed rapid transport scheme from Ashton Park > and Ride to the centre of
Bristol. The bridge isn't wide enough for > two way bendy buses otherwise we
may have faced the prospect of > closure to ALL other types of traffic. As it
is, the bendy buses need > more than half of the bridge so a small space
alongside these > monsters can be spared for pedestrians and cyclists. Neither
cycling > nor pedestrian organisations appear to have been consulted about >
these plans and the RT consultants are being very coy about how much > space
will be left for these most sustainable means of transport.Tess > Green> On 6
Nov 2008, at 10:47, Charles Bolton wrote:> > > As an alternative to residents
parking, what do people think about > > proposals to close half of Prince St
Bridge to vehicles, put in > > traffic lights and leave the rest for
cyclists/pedestrians?> >> >> >> > Charlie Bolton> > Green Party Councillor> >
Southville> >> >
______________________________________________________________________> > 'Do
it online' with our growing range of online services - http:// > >
www.bristol.gov.uk/services> >> > Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news,
have-your-say and event > > information at:
http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect> >> > View webcasts of Council meetings at
http://www.bristol.gov.uk/webcast> >> > charles bolton> > Southville, Bristol>
> Info about charlie bolton: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/ > >
charliebolton> >> > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e- >
> democracy.org/r/topic/3wTwhdmomInaPoWoVvGfg> >
-----------------------------------------> > To post, send your message to:
<email obscured>> > To leave or for daily digest, type
"unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> > in subject line and send to:
<email obscured>> >> > More info about Bristol - Greater
Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:> >
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum> >> > E-Democracy.Org rules:
http://e-democracy.org/rules> > -----------------------------------------> >
Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net> >> > > >
Tess Green> > Info about Tess Green: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/27STqVp8pDYXMasWi22T7r>
-----------------------------------------> To post, send your message to:
<email obscured>> To leave or for daily digest, type
"unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> in subject line and send to:
<email obscured>> > More info about Bristol - Greater
Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum: >
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum> > E-Democracy.Org rules:
http://e-democracy.org/rules> ----------------------------------------->
Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
_________________________________________________________________
See the most popular videos on the web
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/115454061/direct/01/

From: Tess Green Date: Nov 07 17:59 UTC Short link

You are entitled to your version of events, Matthew but I definitely
heard Sharon Daly tell us that Prince Street Bridge was an option for
the bendy bus route. And yes, in response to comments she did
acknowledge the  possible difficulties. I didn't get the chance to
question the engineering difficulties of removing the central support
but I think this would ruin the structural strength of the bridge.  I
think it will be very difficult for the community south of the bridge
to judge the effect of this scheme if a new bridge has to be built,
because we don't know where this will be.We need to actively question
the figures which suggest that light rail would be more expensive,
especially as rails are already in place for much of the route
between Ashton and Wapping Wharf and adding bridges and other
engineering to make the proposed scheme workable would raise the cost
of it. You are right, like many of the people at the consultation, I
believe that Light Rail would provide a better solution than bendy
buses on concrete runways. Tess

On 7 Nov 2008, at 07:45, Matthew Symonds wrote:

> Tess
>
> We were both at the same consultation event on the proposed Ashton
> Vale to Temple Meads rapid Transport meeting yesterday and I seem
> to have got a completely different interpretation than you (I'm
> assuming I've interpreted it differently as I'm sure you wouldn't
> intentionally give faulse information).
>
> At the meeting when Prince Street Bridge was discussed it was made
> clear that the trial closure is part of the Cycle Demonstration
> City and not as an advance measure for the rapid transport plan.
>
> The council officers present siad they were still looking at
> options for the Prince Street Bridge one of which was to avoid it
> all together.
>
> We were informed that there are complications with the bridge not
> only due to its size but also that it is a listed structure and
> that they are considering all sorts of options that included a
> route to Temple Meads another way, potentially rebuilding the
> bridge it with the existing sides but the current (structural)
> central support taken out providing more room.
>
> The proposals set out also made very clear that 'high quality
> walking and cycle routes' would be built in alongside any Rapid
> Transport route.The officers were explicit about this.
>
> It was very clear at the meeting that you are very opposed to a bus
> based rapid transport route and would prefer a tram of train based
> option (which we were told was three times more expensive and not
> affordable withing the budget available). You are absolutely
> entitled to your view on this but I think it's not really fair to
> suggest something that simply wasn't said or even implied about
> space for walkers and cyclists.
>
> Matthew
>
> <email obscured>
>
> ---------- __0
>   --------\_ \
> ------- (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol, better by bike
>
>
>
>
> > CC: <email obscured>; <email obscured>;
> <email obscured>; <email obscured>
> > From: <email obscured>
> > Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge
> > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:49:08 -0800
> > To: <email obscured>
> >
> > Unfortunately these proposals are for the use of the bridge for
> bendy
> > buses as part of the proposed rapid transport scheme from Ashton
> Park
> > and Ride to the centre of Bristol. The bridge isn't wide enough for
> > two way bendy buses otherwise we may have faced the prospect of
> > closure to ALL other types of traffic. As it is, the bendy buses
> need
> > more than half of the bridge so a small space alongside these
> > monsters can be spared for pedestrians and cyclists. Neither cycling
> > nor pedestrian organisations appear to have been consulted about
> > these plans and the RT consultants are being very coy about how much
> > space will be left for these most sustainable means of
> transport.Tess
> > Green
> > On 6 Nov 2008, at 10:47, Charles Bolton wrote:
> >
> > > As an alternative to residents parking, what do people think about
> > > proposals to close half of Prince St Bridge to vehicles, put in
> > > traffic lights and leave the rest for cyclists/pedestrians?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Charlie Bolton
> > > Green Party Councillor
> > > Southville
> > >
> > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > > 'Do it online' with our growing range of online services - http://
> > > www.bristol.gov.uk/services
> > >
> > > Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and
> event
> > > information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect
> > >
> > > View webcasts of Council meetings at http://www.bristol.gov.uk/
> webcast
> > >
> > > charles bolton
> > > Southville, Bristol
> > > Info about charlie bolton: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/
> > > charliebolton
> > >
> > > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-
> > > democracy.org/r/topic/3wTwhdmomInaPoWoVvGfg
> > > -----------------------------------------
> > > To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
> > > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> > > in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
> > >
> > > More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
> > > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
> > >
> > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> > > -----------------------------------------
> > > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://
> OnlineGroups.Net
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > Tess Green
> >
> > Info about Tess Green: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen
> >
> > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-
> democracy.org/r/topic/27STqVp8pDYXMasWi22T7r
> > -----------------------------------------
> > To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
> > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> > in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
> >
> > More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
> > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
> >
> > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> > -----------------------------------------
> > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://
> OnlineGroups.Net
>
>
> Win 1000 John Lewis shopping sprees with BigSnapSearch.com Search now

From: Matthew Symonds Date: Nov 08 10:59 UTC Short link

I think that Sharon Daly was saying that in effect the bridge (if rebuilt)
would be a new bridge but disguised to appear as though it were the old bridge
without a central support. If light rail were to run across this route you'd
probably also need to do this. A lot of people probably don't realise that
although the bridge on te outside appears to be metal is it in fact largely a
wooden structure.

The cost of light rail has little to do with whether there are rails laid on
part of the route (and they may need to be relaind in any case) but more to do
with the cost of extending the route so that it would serve the entire length
of the proposed rapid transport route. Any light rail scheme would also raise
the cost as work on the other bridges you mention would also need to to
completed, alongside on road sections and brand new sections (to the park and
ride).

There is evidence to suggest that one thing that discourages people to use
public transport is the though of having to change (reflected in some of the
discussion on this site on proposals to half some of the bus routes) and so if
a light rail only ran up to where the existing rails stop at Wapping Wharf then
be required to change then it wouldn't really encourage people to use the
route. Extending a light rail into the city centre is not something I'm opposed
to but we have to be honest and say it would be hugely more expensive than the
propsed bus based rapid transport scheme.

Someone else mentioned earlier in the discussion about a proposed route for
cyclists through the Wapping Wharf development. Yes this is the case, it will
take cyclist and pedestrains straight ahead once they have crossed Gaol Ferry
Bridge and then down to a new square in front of the new Museum of Bristol
entrance by the waterfront, then left and along in front of the new museum
where they will then link up with Prince Street Bridge. Who knows when this
will development will start but when it does it probably won't be complete for
2-3 years.

I agree with the other comments that the pavement on Prince Street Bridge are
far too narrow and I think that extending the width of the pavement on the
trial closure side would be a good idea, even if only by a little - still
leaving a cycle lane.Matthew <email obscured> ---------- __0

--------\_ \------- (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol, better by bike> CC:
<email obscured>; <email obscured>;
<email obscured>; <email obscured>;
<email obscured>> From: <email obscured>> Subject: Re:
[GB-Forum] Prince St bridge> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:38:03 -0800> To:
<email obscured>> > You are entitled to your version of events,
Matthew but I definitely > heard Sharon Daly tell us that Prince Street Bridge
was an option for > the bendy bus route. And yes, in response to comments she
did > acknowledge the possible difficulties. I didn't get the chance to >
question the engineering difficulties of removing the central support > but I
think this would ruin the structural strength of the bridge. I > think it will
be very difficult for the community south of the bridge > to judge the effect
of this scheme if a new bridge has to be built, > because we don't know where
this will be.We need to actively question > the figures which suggest that
light rail would be more expensive, > especially as rails are already in place
for much of the route > between Ashton and Wapping Wharf and adding bridges and
other > engineering to make the proposed scheme workable would raise the cost >
of it. You are right, like many of the people at the consultation, I > believe
that Light Rail would provide a better solution than bendy > buses on concrete
runways. Tess> On 7 Nov 2008, at 07:45, Matthew Symonds wrote:> > > Tess> >> >
We were both at the same consultation event on the proposed Ashton > > Vale to
Temple Meads rapid Transport meeting yesterday and I seem > > to have got a
completely different interpretation than you (I'm > > assuming I've interpreted
it differently as I'm sure you wouldn't > > intentionally give faulse
information).> >> > At the meeting when Prince Street Bridge was discussed it
was made > > clear that the trial closure is part of the Cycle Demonstration >
> City and not as an advance measure for the rapid transport plan.> >> > The
council officers present siad they were still looking at > > options for the
Prince Street Bridge one of which was to avoid it > > all together.> >> > We
were informed that there are complications with the bridge not > > only due to
its size but also that it is a listed structure and > > that they are
considering all sorts of options that included a > > route to Temple Meads
another way, potentially rebuilding the > > bridge it with the existing sides
but the current (structural) > > central support taken out providing more
room.> >> > The proposals set out also made very clear that 'high quality > >
walking and cycle routes' would be built in alongside any Rapid > > Transport
route.The officers were explicit about this.> >> > It was very clear at the
meeting that you are very opposed to a bus > > based rapid transport route and
would prefer a tram of train based > > option (which we were told was three
times more expensive and not > > affordable withing the budget available). You
are absolutely > > entitled to your view on this but I think it's not really
fair to > > suggest something that simply wasn't said or even implied about > >
space for walkers and cyclists.> >> > Matthew> >> > <email obscured>>
>> > ---------- __0> > --------\_ \> > ------- (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol,
better by bike> >> >> >> >> > > CC: <email obscured>;
<email obscured>; > > <email obscured>;
<email obscured>> > > From: <email obscured>> > > Subject: Re:
[GB-Forum] Prince St bridge> > > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:49:08 -0800> > > To:
<email obscured>> > >> > > Unfortunately these proposals are for
the use of the bridge for > > bendy> > > buses as part of the proposed rapid
transport scheme from Ashton > > Park> > > and Ride to the centre of Bristol.
The bridge isn't wide enough for> > > two way bendy buses otherwise we may have
faced the prospect of> > > closure to ALL other types of traffic. As it is, the
bendy buses > > need> > > more than half of the bridge so a small space
alongside these> > > monsters can be spared for pedestrians and cyclists.
Neither cycling> > > nor pedestrian organisations appear to have been consulted
about> > > these plans and the RT consultants are being very coy about how
much> > > space will be left for these most sustainable means of > >
transport.Tess> > > Green> > > On 6 Nov 2008, at 10:47, Charles Bolton wrote:>
> >> > > > As an alternative to residents parking, what do people think about>
> > > proposals to close half of Prince St Bridge to vehicles, put in> > > >
traffic lights and leave the rest for cyclists/pedestrians?> > > >> > > >> > >
>> > > > Charlie Bolton> > > > Green Party Councillor> > > > Southville> > > >>
> > > > >
______________________________________________________________________> > > >
'Do it online' with our growing range of online services - http://> > > >
www.bristol.gov.uk/services> > > >> > > > Sign-up for our email bulletin giving
news, have-your-say and > > event> > > > information at:
http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect> > > >> > > > View webcasts of Council
meetings at http://www.bristol.gov.uk/ > > webcast> > > >> > > > charles
bolton> > > > Southville, Bristol> > > > Info about charlie bolton:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/> > > > charliebolton> > > >> > > > This
topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-> > > >
democracy.org/r/topic/3wTwhdmomInaPoWoVvGfg> > > >
-----------------------------------------> > > > To post, send your message to:
<email obscured>> > > > To leave or for daily digest, type
"unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> > > > in subject line and send to:
<email obscured>> > > >> > > > More info about Bristol -
Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:> > > >
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum> > > >> > > > E-Democracy.Org
rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules> > > >
-----------------------------------------> > > > Technical assistance thanks to
our friends at http:// > > OnlineGroups.Net> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > > Tess
Green> > >> > > Info about Tess Green:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen> > >> > > This topic's messages may
be viewed at: http://forums.e- > >
democracy.org/r/topic/27STqVp8pDYXMasWi22T7r> > >
-----------------------------------------> > > To post, send your message to:
<email obscured>> > > To leave or for daily digest, type
"unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> > > in subject line and send to:
<email obscured>> > >> > > More info about Bristol - Greater
Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:> > >
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum> > >> > > E-Democracy.Org
rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules> > >
-----------------------------------------> > > Technical assistance thanks to
our friends at http:// > > OnlineGroups.Net> >> >> > Win 1000 John Lewis
shopping sprees with BigSnapSearch.com Search now> > > Tess Green> > Info about
Tess Green: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen> > This topic's messages
may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4EoDv2xyu8temsobqRuWsn>
-----------------------------------------> To post, send your message to:
<email obscured>> To leave or for daily digest, type
"unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> in subject line and send to:
<email obscured>> > More info about Bristol - Greater
Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum: >
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum> > E-Democracy.Org rules:
http://e-democracy.org/rules> ----------------------------------------->
Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
_________________________________________________________________
See the most popular videos on the web
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/115454061/direct/01/

From: Eric Booth Date: Nov 08 13:53 UTC Short link

Do you remember that about 10 years ago the bridge was closed for
'strengthening', I believe using EU money to upgrade bridges to take the new 42
ton HGVs. Now I don't think there's any question of it taking those loads, but
I suggest that it's possibly capable of taking far more than the current 3 ton
limit as signed without significant modification.

It's been suggested to me that on the East side the pavement would be removed
in which case it's plenty wide enough for a bus. This route could be bus only
with lights to prioritse them as they arrive, but if they're only every few
minutes then the rest of the time bikes could use it uninterrupted.

On the West side there could/should also be no pavement but a full width
pedestrian route.

I think this would be an improvement for pedestrians but I don't believe offers
any benefits to cyclists.

I wasn't at the meeting that Matthew and Tess were at, but given the thinking
and planning that's gone into the bus rapid transport, and given that the
proposal offers no benefit to cyclists, I'd guess cyclists and the Cycling City
project were being rather set up to take the flak when it's actually the bus
agenda driving the plans.

From: Stephen Wickham Date: Nov 08 15:34 UTC Short link

Dear All,

Please can we instigate a separate discussion thread for the Ultra Light Rail /
Rapid Transit/ Bendy bus "Consultation" along the New Cut. And can everyone try
to get to one of the information meetings where they tell us what they are
going to apply for funding for in January.....because they want our opinions on
this by the end of November, postal deadline being about 18 days from now. Next
one at the tobacco factory (upstairs, not the green room? ) is
Wednesday 12th November 6.00pm



The valid issue of Prince Street Bridge which is a long rumbling political
"football" debate is otherwise about to be lost in translation of different
peoples arguments and opinions about car commuting  and bicycles merging with
the rapid transit issue which is bigger than Prince Street in impact. (or may
avoid Prince Street in the designers options)

I was at the "Consultation" on Thursday, there were obviously at least Four
contradictory points of view in the melting pot excluding the schemes
champions...e.g. Mathew , Tess, George, Myself, etc, not to mention the good
people of Ashton who may or may not be contributors to this forum......but
obviously everyone was being ambushed by new information as the TWO
consultations including the ring road were being explained ....and I have no
doubt some thought they were being told about the Other consultation as that
occurred!!!!

I have to say that I think the issue of competing uses for Prince St Bridge
(which is a listed structure) has come to a head because docks crossings were
dropped from the deposit local plan for "harbourside"  in 1993 and not
reinstated in the 2003 local plan amendments in the light of mobilisation of
the Cannons Marsh developments and the closure of the Inner Circuit Road in the
interim. An oversight I attempted to point out as an accepted amendment in 2003
but worded differently! In case people have not noticed thats NO CIVIC PLAN ,
with a structure made reasonably redundant in about 1950 by the Redcliff bridge
dual carriageway, having been simultaneously re-adopted by pedestrians and car
drivers finding new routes at around the millennium.

I have a longer piece on Prince St which I intend to re-edit....

all best
Stephen Wickham


----- Original Message -----
  From: Matthew Symonds
  To: Tess SSP Green
  Cc: charlie BCC Bolton ; Ben SCDA Barker ; <email obscured> ;
Bemmy forum GBCP ; <email obscured>
  Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2008 10:58 AM
  Subject: RE: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge



  I think that Sharon Daly was saying that in effect the bridge (if rebuilt)
would be a new bridge but disguised to appear as though it were the old bridge
without a central support. If light rail were to run across this route you'd
probably also need to do this. A lot of people probably don't realise that
although the bridge on te outside appears to be metal is it in fact largely a
wooden structure.

  The cost of light rail has little to do with whether there are rails laid on
part of the route (and they may need to be relaind in any case) but more to do
with the cost of extending the route so that it would serve the entire length
of the proposed rapid transport route. Any light rail scheme would also raise
the cost as work on the other bridges you mention would also need to to
completed, alongside on road sections and brand new sections (to the park and
ride).

  There is evidence to suggest that one thing that discourages people to use
public transport is the though of having to change (reflected in some of the
discussion on this site on proposals to half some of the bus routes) and so if
a light rail only ran up to where the existing rails stop at Wapping Wharf then
be required to change then it wouldn't really encourage people to use the
route. Extending a light rail into the city centre is not something I'm opposed
to but we have to be honest and say it would be hugely more expensive than the
propsed bus based rapid transport scheme.

  Someone else mentioned earlier in the discussion about a proposed route for
cyclists through the Wapping Wharf development. Yes this is the case, it will
take cyclist and pedestrains straight ahead once they have crossed Gaol Ferry
Bridge and then down to a new square in front of the new Museum of Bristol
entrance by the waterfront, then left and along in front of the new museum
where they will then link up with Prince Street Bridge. Who knows when this
will development will start but when it does it probably won't be complete for
2-3 years.

  I agree with the other comments that the pavement on Prince Street Bridge are
far too narrow and I think that extending the width of the pavement on the
trial closure side would be a good idea, even if only by a little - still
leaving a cycle lane.

  Matthew

  <email obscured>

  ---------- __0
    --------\_ \
  ------- (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol, better by bike




  > CC: <email obscured>; <email obscured>;
<email obscured>; <email obscured>;
<email obscured>
  > From: <email obscured>
  > Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge
  > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:38:03 -0800
  > To: <email obscured>
  >
  > You are entitled to your version of events, Matthew but I definitely
  > heard Sharon Daly tell us that Prince Street Bridge was an option for
  > the bendy bus route. And yes, in response to comments she did
  > acknowledge the possible difficulties. I didn't get the chance to
  > question the engineering difficulties of removing the central support
  > but I think this would ruin the structural strength of the bridge. I
  > think it will be very difficult for the community south of the bridge
  > to judge the effect of this scheme if a new bridge has to be built,
  > because we don't know where this will be.We need to actively question
  > the figures which suggest that light rail would be more expensive,
  > especially as rails are already in place for much of the route
  > between Ashton and Wapping Wharf and adding bridges and other
  > engineering to make the proposed scheme workable would raise the cost
  > of it. You are right, like many of the people at the consultation, I
  > believe that Light Rail would provide a better solution than bendy
  > buses on concrete runways. Tess
  > On 7 Nov 2008, at 07:45, Matthew Symonds wrote:
  >
  > > Tess
  > >
  > > We were both at the same consultation event on the proposed Ashton
  > > Vale to Temple Meads rapid Transport meeting yesterday and I seem
  > > to have got a completely different interpretation than you (I'm
  > > assuming I've interpreted it differently as I'm sure you wouldn't
  > > intentionally give faulse information).
  > >
  > > At the meeting when Prince Street Bridge was discussed it was made
  > > clear that the trial closure is part of the Cycle Demonstration
  > > City and not as an advance measure for the rapid transport plan.
  > >
  > > The council officers present siad they were still looking at
  > > options for the Prince Street Bridge one of which was to avoid it
  > > all together.
  > >
  > > We were informed that there are complications with the bridge not
  > > only due to its size but also that it is a listed structure and
  > > that they are considering all sorts of options that included a
  > > route to Temple Meads another way, potentially rebuilding the
  > > bridge it with the existing sides but the current (structural)
  > > central support taken out providing more room.
  > >
  > > The proposals set out also made very clear that 'high quality
  > > walking and cycle routes' would be built in alongside any Rapid
  > > Transport route.The officers were explicit about this.
  > >
  > > It was very clear at the meeting that you are very opposed to a bus
  > > based rapid transport route and would prefer a tram of train based
  > > option (which we were told was three times more expensive and not
  > > affordable withing the budget available). You are absolutely
  > > entitled to your view on this but I think it's not really fair to
  > > suggest something that simply wasn't said or even implied about
  > > space for walkers and cyclists.
  > >
  > > Matthew
  > >
  > > <email obscured>
  > >
  > > ---------- __0
  > > --------\_ \
  > > ------- (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol, better by bike
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > >
  > > > CC: <email obscured>; <email obscured>;
  > > <email obscured>; <email obscured>
  > > > From: <email obscured>
  > > > Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge
  > > > Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:49:08 -0800
  > > > To: <email obscured>
  > > >
  > > > Unfortunately these proposals are for the use of the bridge for
  > > bendy
  > > > buses as part of the proposed rapid transport scheme from Ashton
  > > Park
  > > > and Ride to the centre of Bristol. The bridge isn't wide enough for
  > > > two way bendy buses otherwise we may have faced the prospect of
  > > > closure to ALL other types of traffic. As it is, the bendy buses
  > > need
  > > > more than half of the bridge so a small space alongside these
  > > > monsters can be spared for pedestrians and cyclists. Neither cycling
  > > > nor pedestrian organisations appear to have been consulted about
  > > > these plans and the RT consultants are being very coy about how much
  > > > space will be left for these most sustainable means of
  > > transport.Tess
  > > > Green
  > > > On 6 Nov 2008, at 10:47, Charles Bolton wrote:
  > > >
  > > > > As an alternative to residents parking, what do people think about
  > > > > proposals to close half of Prince St Bridge to vehicles, put in
  > > > > traffic lights and leave the rest for cyclists/pedestrians?
  > > > >
  > > > >
  > > > >
  > > > > Charlie Bolton
  > > > > Green Party Councillor
  > > > > Southville
  > > > >
  > > > >
  > > ______________________________________________________________________
  > > > > 'Do it online' with our growing range of online services - http://
  > > > > www.bristol.gov.uk/services
  > > > >
  > > > > Sign-up for our email bulletin giving news, have-your-say and
  > > event
  > > > > information at: http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect
  > > > >
  > > > > View webcasts of Council meetings at http://www.bristol.gov.uk/
  > > webcast
  > > > >
  > > > > charles bolton
  > > > > Southville, Bristol
  > > > > Info about charlie bolton: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/
  > > > > charliebolton
  > > > >
  > > > > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-
  > > > > democracy.org/r/topic/3wTwhdmomInaPoWoVvGfg
  > > > > -----------------------------------------
  > > > > To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
  > > > > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
  > > > > in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
  > > > >
  > > > > More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
  > > > > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
  > > > >
  > > > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
  > > > > -----------------------------------------
  > > > > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://
  > > OnlineGroups.Net
  > > > >
  > > >
  > > >
  > > >
  > > > Tess Green
  > > >
  > > > Info about Tess Green: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen
  > > >
  > > > This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-
  > > democracy.org/r/topic/27STqVp8pDYXMasWi22T7r
  > > > -----------------------------------------
  > > > To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
  > > > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
  > > > in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
  > > >
  > > > More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
  > > > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
  > > >
  > > > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
  > > > -----------------------------------------
  > > > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://
  > > OnlineGroups.Net
  > >
  > >
  > > Win 1000 John Lewis shopping sprees with BigSnapSearch.com Search now
  >
  >
  > Tess Green
  >
  > Info about Tess Green: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen
  >
  > This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4EoDv2xyu8temsobqRuWsn
  > -----------------------------------------
  > To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
  > To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
  > in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
  >
  > More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
  > http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
  >
  > E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
  > -----------------------------------------
  > Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net



------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Read amazing stories to your kids on Messenger Try it Now!

From: George Ferguson Date: Nov 09 16:31 UTC Short link

As someone who deals a lot with English Heritage I can assure you that it is
very unlikely that they would sanction any major alterations to this listed
structure so that if a tram or bus requires a wider lane it is likely that
it would entail a new crossing.

All the best  George

George Ferguson

TOBACCO FACTORY
Raleigh Road
Southville
Bristol BS3 1TF

Website  http://www.tobaccofactory.com

Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail

> From: Matthew Symonds <matthewsymonds@hotmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 10:58:57 +0000
> To: Tess SSP Green <fiducia@blueyonder.co.uk>
> Cc: charlie BCC Bolton <charles.bolton@bristol.gov.uk>, Ben SCDA Barker
> <benbarker@blueyonder.co.uk>, <stephen_wickham@btinternet.com>, Bemmy forum
> GBCP <bemmy-forum@forums.e-democracy.org>, <slowman_xxx@yahoo.co.uk>
> Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge
>
>
>
> I think that Sharon Daly was saying that in effect the bridge (if rebuilt)
> would be a new bridge but disguised to appear as though it were the old
bridge
> without a central support. If light rail were to run across this route you'd
> probably also need to do this. A lot of people probably don't realise that
> although the bridge on te outside appears to be metal is it in fact largely a
> wooden structure.
>
> The cost of light rail has little to do with whether there are rails laid on
> part of the route (and they may need to be relaind in any case) but more to
do
> with the cost of extending the route so that it would serve the entire length
> of the proposed rapid transport route. Any light rail scheme would also raise
> the cost as work on the other bridges you mention would also need to to
> completed, alongside on road sections and brand new sections (to the park and
> ride).
>
> There is evidence to suggest that one thing that discourages people to use
> public transport is the though of having to change (reflected in some of the
> discussion on this site on proposals to half some of the bus routes) and so
if
> a light rail only ran up to where the existing rails stop at Wapping Wharf
> then be required to change then it wouldn't really encourage people to use
the
> route. Extending a light rail into the city centre is not something I'm
> opposed to but we have to be honest and say it would be hugely more expensive
> than the propsed bus based rapid transport scheme.
>
> Someone else mentioned earlier in the discussion about a proposed route for
> cyclists through the Wapping Wharf development. Yes this is the case, it will
> take cyclist and pedestrains straight ahead once they have crossed Gaol Ferry
> Bridge and then down to a new square in front of the new Museum of Bristol
> entrance by the waterfront, then left and along in front of the new museum
> where they will then link up with Prince Street Bridge. Who knows when this
> will development will start but when it does it probably won't be complete
for
> 2-3 years.
>
> I agree with the other comments that the pavement on Prince Street Bridge are
> far too narrow and I think that extending the width of the pavement on the
> trial closure side would be a good idea, even if only by a little - still
> leaving a cycle lane.Matthew <email obscured> ---------- __0
> --------\_ \------- (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol, better by bike> CC:
> <email obscured>; <email obscured>;
> <email obscured>; <email obscured>;
> <email obscured>> From: <email obscured>> Subject: Re:
> [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 18:38:03 -0800> To:
> <email obscured>> > You are entitled to your version of events,
> Matthew but I definitely > heard Sharon Daly tell us that Prince Street
Bridge
> was an option for > the bendy bus route. And yes, in response to comments she
> did > acknowledge the possible difficulties. I didn't get the chance to >
> question the engineering difficulties of removing t
>  he central support > but I think this would ruin the structural strength of
> the bridge. I > think it will be very difficult for the community south of
the
> bridge > to judge the effect of this scheme if a new bridge has to be built,
>
> because we don't know where this will be.We need to actively question > the
> figures which suggest that light rail would be more expensive, > especially
as
> rails are already in place for much of the route > between Ashton and Wapping
> Wharf and adding bridges and other > engineering to make the proposed scheme
> workable would raise the cost > of it. You are right, like many of the people
> at the consultation, I > believe that Light Rail would provide a better
> solution than bendy > buses on concrete runways. Tess> On 7 Nov 2008, at
> 07:45, Matthew Symonds wrote:> > > Tess> >> > We were both at the same
> consultation event on the proposed Ashton > > Vale to Temple Meads rapid
> Transport meeting yesterday and I seem > > to have got a completely different
>  interpretation than you (I'm > > assuming I've interpreted it differently as
> I'm sure you wouldn't > > intentionally give faulse information).> >> > At
the
> meeting when Prince Street Bridge was discussed it was made > > clear that
the
> trial closure is part of the Cycle Demonstration > > City and not as an
> advance measure for the rapid transport plan.> >> > The council officers
> present siad they were still looking at > > options for the Prince Street
> Bridge one of which was to avoid it > > all together.> >> > We were informed
> that there are complications with the bridge not > > only due to its size but
> also that it is a listed structure and > > that they are considering all
sorts
> of options that included a > > route to Temple Meads another way, potentially
> rebuilding the > > bridge it with the existing sides but the current
> (structural) > > central support taken out providing more room.> >> > The
> proposals set out also made very clear that 'high quality > > walking and
> cycle
>  routes' would be built in alongside any Rapid > > Transport route.The
> officers were explicit about this.> >> > It was very clear at the meeting
that
> you are very opposed to a bus > > based rapid transport route and would
prefer
> a tram of train based > > option (which we were told was three times more
> expensive and not > > affordable withing the budget available). You are
> absolutely > > entitled to your view on this but I think it's not really fair
> to > > suggest something that simply wasn't said or even implied about > >
> space for walkers and cyclists.> >> > Matthew> >> >
> <email obscured>> >> > ---------- __0> > --------\_ \> > -------
> (+)/ (+) ________ Bristol, better by bike> >> >> >> >> > > CC:
> <email obscured>; <email obscured>; > >
> <email obscured>; <email obscured>> > > From:
> <email obscured>> > > Subject: Re: [GB-Forum] Prince St bridge> > >
> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 15:49:08 -0800> > > To: charles.bolton@
>  bristol.gov.uk> > >> > > Unfortunately these proposals are for the use of
the
> bridge for > > bendy> > > buses as part of the proposed rapid transport
scheme
> from Ashton > > Park> > > and Ride to the centre of Bristol. The bridge isn't
> wide enough for> > > two way bendy buses otherwise we may have faced the
> prospect of> > > closure to ALL other types of traffic. As it is, the bendy
> buses > > need> > > more than half of the bridge so a small space alongside
> these> > > monsters can be spared for pedestrians and cyclists. Neither
> cycling> > > nor pedestrian organisations appear to have been consulted
about>
> > > these plans and the RT consultants are being very coy about how much> > >
> space will be left for these most sustainable means of > > transport.Tess> >
>
> Green> > > On 6 Nov 2008, at 10:47, Charles Bolton wrote:> > >> > > > As an
> alternative to residents parking, what do people think about> > > > proposals
> to close half of Prince St Bridge to vehicles, put in> > > > traffi
>  c lights and leave the rest for cyclists/pedestrians?> > > >> > > >> > > >>
>
> > > Charlie Bolton> > > > Green Party Councillor> > > > Southville> > > >> >
>
> > > > ______________________________________________________________________>
> > > > 'Do it online' with our growing range of online services - http://> > >
> > www.bristol.gov.uk/services> > > >> > > > Sign-up for our email bulletin
> giving news, have-your-say and > > event> > > > information at:
> ">http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect>
<http://www.bristol.gov.uk/newsdirect>
> > >> > > > View webcasts of Council
> meetings at http://www.bristol.gov.uk/ > > webcast> > > >> > > > charles
> bolton> > > > Southville, Bristol> > > > Info about charlie bolton:
> ">http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/> <http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/>  > > >
charliebolton> > > >> > > > This
> topic's messages may be viewed at: ">http://forums.e-> <http://forums.e->  >
>
>
> democracy.org/r/topic/3wTwhdmomInaPoWoVvGfg> > > >
> -----------------------------------------> > > > To post, send your message
> to: <email obscured>> > > > To leave or for
>   daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> > > > in subject line and
> send to: <email obscured>> > > >> > > > More info about
> Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:> > > >
> ">http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum>
<http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum>  > > >> > > >
E-Democracy.Org
> rules: ">http://e-democracy.org/rules> <http://e-democracy.org/rules>  > > >
> -----------------------------------------> > > > Technical assistance thanks
> to our friends at http:// > > OnlineGroups.Net> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >
Tess
> Green> > >> > > Info about Tess Green:
> ">http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen>
<http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen>  > >> > > This topic's messages may
> be viewed at: http://forums.e- > >
> democracy.org/r/topic/27STqVp8pDYXMasWi22T7r> > >
> -----------------------------------------> > > To post, send your message to:
> <email obscured>> > > To leave or for daily digest, type
> "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> > > in subject line and send to:
> <email obscured>> > >> > > More info about Bristol -
Greater
> Bedmi
>  nster Neighbourhood Forum:> > >
> ">http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum>
<http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum>  > >> > > E-Democracy.Org
> rules: ">http://e-democracy.org/rules> <http://e-democracy.org/rules>  > >
> -----------------------------------------> > > Technical assistance thanks to
> our friends at http:// > > OnlineGroups.Net> >> >> > Win 1000 John Lewis
> shopping sprees with BigSnapSearch.com Search now> > > Tess Green> > Info
> about Tess Green: ">http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen>
<http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/tessgreen>  > This topic's
> messages may be viewed at:
> ">http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4EoDv2xyu8temsobqRuWsn>
<http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4EoDv2xyu8temsobqRuWsn>
> -----------------------------------------> To post, send your message to:
> <email obscured>> To leave or for daily digest, type
> "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"> in subject line and send to:
> <email obscured>> > More info about Bristol - Greater
> Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum: >
> ">http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum>
<http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum>  > E-Democracy.Org rules:
> ">http://e-democracy.org/rules> <http://e-democracy.org/rules>
-----------------------------------
>  ------> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at
http://OnlineGroups.Net
> _________________________________________________________________
> See the most popular videos on the web
> http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/115454061/direct/01/
> Matthew Symonds
> Southville, Bristol
> Info about Matthew Symonds: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/matthewsymonds
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/7cxX9fuuRwoqPbmGFiXa34
> -----------------------------------------
>   To post, send your message to: <email obscured>
>   To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
>   in subject line and send to: <email obscured>
>
>   More info about Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum:
>   http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/bemmy-forum
>
>   E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net

From: Steve Loughan Date: Nov 14 20:36 UTC Short link

If they take away the pedestrian crossing on the east side then the bridge will
be wide enough for BRT and other buses. There will be a bit of a tricky bend to
get in an out, but we all know there are no safety issues with bendy buses,
based on the london dataset. Dont we?

* If you look at the E.P. article announcing the plan, it pushed the benefits
to pedestrians and bikes, and mentioned that "also" you could get BRT on it.
* The BRT vision video manages to skirt over the problem. Think we need another
FOI request there.
* Although an article has appeared with the "option" of a new bridge, we don't
think there is enough money in the kitty after the commitments to do other
bridges and things.
* Councils seem to be better at getting English Heritage to change their mind
than other organisations.

If you closed the bridge to all traffic, pedestrians and cyclists would
benefit. That would leave the problem of BRT routing, assuming it proceeds. Can
I point out the rumoured existence of a tunnel from beside the Ostrich Pub to
templemeads?

Add to the topic Prince St bridge [?]

You cannot post because you are not logged in. If you are a member Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum, login to post to this topic. Otherwise sign up, become a member of Bristol - Greater Bedminster Neighbourhood Forum, and post to this topic.

Need help? Please contact technical support. To support your forum, please donate. Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using GroupServer.